Advertisement

The Logics of the Media and the Mediatized Conditions of Social Interaction

  • Stig Hjarvard
Chapter
Part of the Transforming Communications – Studies in Cross-Media Research book series (TCSCMR)

Abstract

The notion of ‘media logics’ is useful for understanding the processes of mediatization and the ways in which media come to influence communication and social interaction in various domains of society. Media logics are the combined technological, aesthetic, and institutional modus operandi of the media and logics may in a general sociological vocabulary be understood as the rules and resources that govern a particular institutional domain. Media logics do‚ however‚ rarely exert their influence in isolation. We need to consider the media’s influence on an aggregate level and not only at the level of the individual media and its particular logics. Mediatization involves cultural and social processes in which logics of both media and other institutions are interacting and adapting to each other and through these processes a particular configuration of logics are established within an institutional domain. Such configurations condition, but do not determine communication and social interaction. Within a particular institution such as politics or education‚ the available media repertoire inserts various dynamics to communication and social interaction‚ and these dynamics represent the mediatized conditions of communication and social interaction.

References

  1. Aelst, P. V., Thesen, G., Walgrave, S., & Vliegenthart, R. (2014). Mediatization and political agenda-setting: Changing issue priorities? In F. Esser & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Mediatization of politics. Understanding the transformation of eestern democracies (pp. 200–220). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  2. Altheide, D. L., & Snow, R. P. (1979). Media logic. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  3. Boudon, R. (1991). Review: What middle range theories are. Contemporary Sociology, 20(4), 519–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Castells, M. (2001). The internet galaxy, reflections on the internet, business, and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Castells, M. (2011). A network theory of power. International Journal of Communication, 5, 773–787.Google Scholar
  6. Dijck, J. v. (2013). The culture of connectivity. A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dijk, J. (2012). The network society. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Donges, P., & Jarren, O. (2014). Mediatization of political organizations: Changing parties and interest groups? In F. Esser & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Mediatization of politics. Understanding the transformation of western democracies (pp. 181–199). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  9. Entman, R. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Esser, F. (2013). Mediatization as a challenge: Media logic versus political logic. In H. Kriesi, S. Lavenex, F. Esser, J. Matthes, M. Bühlmann, & D. Bochsler (Eds.), Democracy in the age of globalization and mediatization (pp. 155–176). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Esser, F., & Strömbäck, J. (Eds.). (2014). Mediatization of politics. Understanding the transformation of western democracies. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  12. Frandsen, K. (2014). Mediatization of sports. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization of communication. Handbooks of communication science (Vol. 21) (pp. 199–226). Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  13. Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society. Outline of a theory of structuration. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hall, S. (1983). The problem of ideology—marxism without guarantees. In B. Matthews (Ed.), Marx: A hundred years on (pp. 57–84). London: Lawrence & Wishart.Google Scholar
  15. Hasebrink, U., & Domeyer, H. (2012). Media repertoires as patterns of behaviour and as meaningful practices: A multimethod approach to media use in converging media environments. Participations. Journal of Audience and Reception Studies, 9(2), 757–779.Google Scholar
  16. Hjarvard, S. (2010). Die Mediendynamik der Mohammed-Karikaturen Krise. In A. Hepp, M. Höhn, & Wimmer, J. (Eds.), Medienkultur im Wandel, UVK Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (Schriftenreihe der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Publizistik- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, 37), 169–180.Google Scholar
  17. Hjarvard, S. (2013). The mediatization of culture and society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Hjarvard, S. (2014a). Mediatization and cultural and social change: An institutional perspective. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization of communication. Handbooks of communication science (Vol. 21) (pp. 199–226), Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  19. Hjarvard, S. (2014b). From mediation to mediatization: The institutionalization of new media. In A. Hepp & F. Krotz (Eds.), Mediatized worlds: Culture and society in a media age (pp. 123–142). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hjarvard, S. (Ed.). (2016). Medialisering. Mediernes rolle I social og kulturel forandring [Mediatization: The Role of Media in Social and Cultural Change]. Copenhagen: Hans Reitzels Forlag.Google Scholar
  21. Hjarvard, S., Mortensen, M., & Eskjær, M. (2015). Three dynamics of mediatized conflicts. In M. Eskjær, S. Hjarvard, & M. Mortensen (Eds.), The dynamics of mediatized conflicts (pp. 1–27). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  22. Kammer, A. (2013). Audience participation in the production of online news. Towards a typology. Nordicom Review, 34 (Special Issue), 113–126.Google Scholar
  23. Klinger, U., & Svensson, J. (2014). The emergence of network media logic in political communication: A theoretical approach. New Media & Society, 17(8), 1–17.Google Scholar
  24. Lasswell, H. D. (1948). The structure and function of communication in society. In L. Bryson (Ed.), The communication of ideas. New York: Institute for Religious and Social Studies.Google Scholar
  25. Ling, R. (2012). Taken for grantedness: The embedding of mobile communication into society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Lundby, K. (2009). Media logic: Looking for social interaction. In K. Lundby (Ed.), Mediatization: Concept, changes, consequences (pp. 101–119). New York: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  27. Lundby, K. (Ed.) (2014). Mediatization of communication. Handbook of communication science (Vol. 21). Boston and Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
  28. Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  29. Meyrowitz, J. (1993). Images of the media: Hidden ferment—and harmony—in the field. Journal of Communication, 43(3), 55–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Rainie, L., & Wellmann, B. (2014). Networked. The new social operating system. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Simmel, G. (1971 [1920]). Sociability. In D. N. Levine (Ed.), On individuality and social forms (pp. 127–140). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  32. Strömbäck, J. (2008). Four phases of mediatization: An analysis of the mediatization of politics. International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(3), 228–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Strömbäck, J., & Esser, F. (2014). A paradigm in the making: Lessons for the future of mediatization research. In F. Esser & J. Strömbäck (Eds.), Mediatization of politics. Understanding the transformation of western democracies (pp. 223–242). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  34. Thompson, J. B. (2000). Political scandal, power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  35. Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W., & Lounsbury, M. (2012). The institutional logics perspective. A new approach to culture, structure and process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Webster, J. G. (2014). The marketplace of attention. How audiences take shape in a digital age. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Media, Cognition and CommunicationUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen SDenmark

Personalised recommendations